Foreign Policy In Focus, CommonDreams.org,
and Z Network, May 2, 2006
With even mainstream media outlets like the Washington Post and The New Yorker publishing credible stories that the United States is seriously planning a military attack on Iran, increasing numbers of Americans are expressing concerns about the consequences of the United States launching another war that would once again place the United States in direct contravention of international law. The latest National Security Strategy document published earlier this year labeled Iran as the most serious challenge to the United States posed by any country. This should be an indication of just how safe the United States is in the post-Cold War world, where the “most serious challenge” is no longer a rival superpower…
Category: Israel and Palestine
Israel and Palestine
How Washington Goaded Israel
Foreign Policy In Focus, Aug. 18, 2006,
by John Feffer, Stephen Zunes [source]
There is increasing evidence that Israel instigated a disastrous war on Lebanon largely at the behest of the United States. The Bush administration was set on crippling Hezbollah, the radical Shiite political movement that maintains a sizable block of seats in the Lebanese parliament. Taking advantage of the country’s democratic opening after the forced departure of Syrian troops last year, Hezbollah defied U.S. efforts to democratize the region on American terms. The populist party’s unwillingness to disarm its militia as required by UN resolution?and the inability of the pro-Western Lebanese government to force them to do so?led the Bush administration to push Israel to take military action…
Why the Dems Have Failed Lebanon
Foreign Policy In Focus, August 9, 2006, by John Feffer, Stephen Zunes
The Bush administration’s unconditional support for Israel’s attacks on Lebanon is emblematic of the profound tragedy of U.S. policy in the region over the past five years. The administration has relied largely on force rather than diplomacy. It has shown a willingness to violate international legal norms, a callousness regarding massive civilian casualties, a dismissive attitude toward our closest allies whose security interests we share, and blatant double standards on UN Security Council resolutions, non-proliferation issues, and human rights. A broad consensus of moderate Arabs, Middle East scholars, independent security analysts, European leaders, and others have recognized how?even putting important moral and legal issues aside?such policies have been a disaster for the national security interests of the United States and other Western nations. These policies have only further radicalized the region and increased support for Hezbollah and other extremists and supporters of terrorism… [source]
Jihad Against Hezbollah
Foreign Policy In Focus, Aug. 4, 2006, By John Feffer, Stephen Zunes,
and Alternet Aug. 8 as ‘Was Hezbollah a Legitimate Target?’ [source]
The Bush administration and an overwhelming bipartisan majority of Congress have gone on record defending Israel’s assault on Lebanon’s civilian infrastructure as a means of attacking Hezbollah “terrorists.” However, unlike the major Palestinian Islamist groups, Hamas and Islamic Jihad, Hezbollah forces haven’t killed any Israeli civilians for more than a decade. Indeed, a 2002 Congressional Research Service report noted, in its analysis of Hezbollah, that ?no major terrorist attacks have been attributed to it since 1994….
Israel Will Create More Terrorists Than It Kills
Foreign Policy In Focus, July 24, 2006, By Stephen Zunes [source]
This op-ed also ran in the South Florida Sun-Sentinel on July 22, 2006.
The Bush administration’s contempt for the United Nations Charter, the Fourth Geneva Convention and the other fundamental principles of international law has once again been laid bare by its defense of the ongoing Israeli assault against Lebanon…
Congress and the Israeli Attack on Lebanon: A Critical Reading
Foreign Policy In Focus, July 22, 2006
By John Feffer, Stephen Zunes [source]
On July 20, the U.S. House of Representatives, by an overwhelming 410-8 margin, voted to unconditionally endorse Israel’s ongoing attacks on Lebanon and the Gaza Strip. The Senate passed a similar resolution defending the Israeli attack earlier in the week by a voice vote, but included a clause that “urges all sides to protect innocent civilian life and infrastructure.” By contrast, the House version omits this section and even praises Israel for “minimizing civilian loss,” despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary. The resolution also praises President George W. Bush for “fully supporting Israel,” even though Bush has blocked diplomatic efforts for a cease-fire and has isolated the United States in the international community by supporting the Israeli attacks…
Congressional Legislation Aimed at Isolating Hamas is Likely to Backfire
Foreign Policy In Focus, June 14, 2006,
By John Gershman, Stephen Zunes [source]
Since the Palestinian Legislative Council elections earlier this year, in which the Islamist group Hamas captured a majority of seats, the Bush administration has suspended U.S. economic assistance to the Palestine Authority (PA) and has led an international effort to impose sanctions against the Palestinians. This has meant enormous hardship for ordinary Palestinians, with reports that hospitals in Gaza have difficulty providing immunizations for children or dialysis machines for kidney patients. The World Health Organization warns of a “rapid decline of the public health system … toward a possible collapse…”
The Israel Lobby: How Powerful is it Really?
Mother Jones & Foreign Policy In Focus, May 18, 2006
By Stephen Zunes [source]
Since its publication in the London Review of Books in March, John Mearsheimer and Steve Walt’s article “The Israel Lobby”—and the longer version published as a working paper for Harvard University’s John F. Kennedy School of Government—has received widespread attention from across the political spectrum. These noted professors put forward two major arguments: the first is the very legitimate and widely acknowledged (outside of official Washington) concern that U.S. Middle East policy, particularly U.S. support for the more controversial policies of the Israeli government, is contrary to the long-term strategic interests of the United States. Their second, and far more questionable, argument is that most of the blame for this misguided policy rests with the “Israel lobby”…
The Israeli Raid in Jericho: The Background
Foreign Policy In Focus, By John Gershman, Stephen Zunes | March 17, 2006
The origins of the March 14 Israeli raid of a Palestinian prison in Jericho are rooted in another Israeli raid on a Palestinian city in 2001. On August 27 of that year, Israeli occupation forces assaulted the offices of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP) with a U.S.-supplied helicopter gunship and missiles. Their target was PFLP leader Abu Ali Mustafa, who was killed instantly. The PFLP vowed to retaliate… [source]
The Hamas Victory: Another Side to the Story
Foreign Policy In Focus, February 6, 2006
By John Gershman, Stephen Zunes [source]
Lost amidst the predictably negative reaction to the victory by Hamas in the Palestinian parliamentary elections is the crucial role that the U.S. government had in bringing the radical Islamist group to power. Both Congress and the Bush administration are on record insisting that Hamas’ virulent anti-Israel stance and the history of terrorist activities by its armed wing, the Al Qassam Brigades, gives Israel the right to refuse to engage or negotiate with the Palestinians. However, Israel had already suspended peace talks nearly five years ago…
U.S. Undermines Israeli Doves in their Quest for Peace
National Catholic Reporter, Jan. 20, 2006, by Stephen Zunes [source]
With national elections scheduled for the end of March, much attention is being given to the political direction Israeli voters will take their country in the post-Sharon era. During Israel’s last election in January 2003, Prime Minister Ariel Sharon defeated Labor Party leader Amram Mitzna, who had pledged to support a withdrawal of Israeli occupation forces from the bulk of the occupied territories in exchange for security guarantees on terms quite close to proposals made by the Palestinian delegation…
Don’t Blame Israel
Alternet January 14, 2006, by Stephen Zunes [source]
The official rationales for the U.S. invasion of Iraq are now widely acknowledged to have been fabricated: that Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction threatening the national security of the United States and that the Iraqi government had operational ties to al Quaida. As the backup rationalization — bringing freedom and democracy to Iraq — loses credibility, increasing attention is being given as to why the U.S. government, with broad bipartisan support, made such a fateful decision. There are a number of plausible explanations…
The U.S. Invasion of Iraq: Not the Fault of Israel and Its Supporters
Foreign Policy In Focus, January 3, 2006
By John Gershman, Stephen Zunes [source]
Also in Alternet as “Don’t Blame Israel” January 14
As the official rationales for the U.S. invasion of Iraq—that Iraq possessed “weapons of mass destruction” which threatened the national security of the United States and that the Iraqi government had operational ties to al-Qaida—are now widely acknowledged to have been fabricated, and the back-up rationalization—of bringing freedom and democracy to Iraq—is also losing credibility, increasing attention is being given as to why the U.S. government, with broad bipartisan support, made such a fateful decision.
Democracy and Double Standards: The Palestinian “Exception”
Foreign Policy In Focus, December 22, 2005
By John Gershman, Stephen Zunes [source]
At a time of year when Jews and Christians are celebrating the spirit of justice and peace inspired by events in the Holy Land many centuries ago, Congress has been working to ensure that the Holy Land of today experiences neither. Just prior to the Christmas recess, a bipartisan resolution in the House of Representatives and a letter signed by 73 of 100 Senators put Congress on record that the U.S. government, despite rhetoric to the contrary, does not take Middle Eastern democracy too seriously…
Lecture video: Occupation and the Attack on International Law
Talk by Prof. Stephen Zunes on “Occupation and the Attack on International Law” given December 9, 2005, in Seattle [57 mins.]
Defense of Israeli Assassination Policy by the Bush Administration and Democratic Leaders
Foreign Policy In Focus, Oct. 2, 2005
By John Gershman, Stephen Zunes [source]
The U.S. veto of a proposed UN Security Council resolution criticizing Israel’s March 22 assassination of Hamas founder Sheik Ahmed Yassin has once again placed the United States both on the fringe of international public opinion and in opposition to international legal norms. Despite the proposed resolution condemning “all attacks against civilians,” the United States once again was the lone dissenting vote, marking the 28 th time since 1970 that the U.S. has blocked a Security Council resolution criticizing the actions of its most important Middle Eastern ally…
The Peace Process Between Israel and Syria
Foreign Policy in Focus/Institute for Policy Studies,
October 4, 2005, by Stephen Zunes [Source]
Key Points
* The U.S. role as a superpower with strong strategic and economic interests in the region often conflicts with its role as mediator in the Israeli-Syrian peace process.
* Syria has moderated its once-belligerent posture toward the Israelis and is now closer to accepting the existence of Israel and living in peace, particularly if the Palestinians are allowed a viable state alongside Israel.
* The United States has maintained its strong support for Israel’s negotiating position, even though Israel now takes a more hard-line posture than its autocratic neighbor.
The Release of Mordechai Vanunu and U.S. Complicity in the Development of Israel’s Nuclear Arsenal
Foreign Policy In Focus, Oct. 2, 2005
By John Gershman & Stephen Zunes [source]
The recent release on April 22 of Mordechai Vanunu from an Israeli prison provides an opportunity to challenge the U.S. policy of supporting Israel ’s development of nuclear weapons while threatening war against other Middle Eastern states for simply having the potential for developing such weaponry. Vanunu, a nuclear technician at Israel ’s Dimona nuclear plant, passed along photographs he had taken inside the plant to the Sunday Times of London in 1986. His evidence demonstrated that Israel had developed up to two hundred nuclear weapons of a highly advanced design, making it the world’s sixth-largest nuclear power…
Congress Overwhelmingly Endorses Ariel Sharon’s Annexation Plans
Foreign Policy In Focus, Oct. 1, 2005
By John Gershman, Stephen Zunes [source]
On Wednesday, June 23, 2004, the U.S. House of Representatives, in an overwhelming bipartisan vote, endorsed right-wing Israeli prime minister Ariel Sharon’s efforts to colonize and annex large sections of the Palestinian West Bank, seized by Israel in the June 1967 war. This was not just another “pro-Israel” (or, more accurately, “pro-Israeli right”) resolution, but an effective renunciation of the post-World War II international system based upon the premise of the illegitimacy of the expansion of a country’s territory by military force…
Israeli Human Rights Abuses and the U.S. Attack on the United Nations and the NGO Community
By Foreign Policy In Focus and Common Dreams, June 30, 2005
By Stephen Zunes [source]
The Bush administration, like its predecessors, has frequently taken advantage of the idealism and values of the U.S. citizenry to justify foreign policies that most Americans would otherwise find morally unacceptable. The recent emphasis on justifying Washington’s imperial goals in Iraq and elsewhere in the Middle East in the name of spreading liberty and democracy is a case in point. The fact that the United States is the world’s principal supporter of autocratic Middle Eastern regimes is conveniently overlooked…